January 2012 Archives

1. Define how wages, labor, commodities, and the cost of production are related in the system of capitalism, as Marx outlines it. What happens to the cost of production as industrial innovations and greater division of labor are introduced, and how does this affect other parts of the system?

From what I was able to comprehend from this chapter, Marx is suggesting that wage, labor, commodities, and the cost of production work in a recurring manner. The process of each entity affects the other. He starts with wage which he defines as the amount of money paid by the capitalist in exchange for the provision of labor. Basically, there is a price to be paid for extracting labor from someone else. The worker's commodity is his labor as confusing as Marx puts it because "for the same sum with which the capitalist has bought their labor, for example, two marks, he could have bought two pounds of sugar or a definite amount of any other commodity. The two marks, which he bought two pounds of sugar, are the price of the two pounds of sugar. The two marks, with which he bought twelve hours' use of labor, are the price of twelve hours' labor." (122) In other words, labor is a commodity neither more or less than sugar because it is purchased with the capitalist's money. The worker exchanges his commodity (labor) for the capitalist's commodity (wage). The worker in order to make his means of subsistence exchanges the commodity (wage) paid to him for other commodities (products) such as food, fuel, and clothing. He is able to purchase these products because the capitalist has paid him for his labor. As Marx also specifies, the wage of a worker is determined by the cost of the commodity he produces. For example, when a product is made, it is bargained for by buyers who want to buy it for a cheap price and sellers who want to sell it at a reasonable price and still profit. Therefore competition arises and when a final price is reached, this price will determine the worker's wage. Marx uses the term "fluctuation" to describe the variation of things that affect the price of commodities (wages and products). The cost of production being one of them affects wage in the sense that the price of labor will depend on the cost of production such as the time inputted into the labor and the amount of effort as well. Basically, the less time you spend working or the less the job requires of you, the less the cost of production of the worker and the lower his wages.
As industrial innovations and greater division of labor are introduced, the cost of production decreases because larger amounts of products are being created in a shorter time with the same amount of labor and capital. The capitalist profits while the worker's relative wage decreases. This means that the margin between capitalist growth and worker wage widens dramatically. It does not mean that the worker's wage won't increase but in the long run, the bourgeois wins and the proletariat loses. At this stage, the worker needs the capitalist in order to make his means of subsistence. His dependence on capital increases.

2. What does Marx mean when he says that the interests of capitalists and workers are "one in the same?" How are the fates of wage-laborers inextricably tied to those who buy their labor-power (the capitalists)? What are the ultimate implications of this relationship, according to Marx?

In Marx's society, the wage-laborers sell their labor as a commodity to the capitalists. The capitalists then turn around and sell the product for a profit resulting in surplus value. The capitalists obtain their profit by paying as little in wages as possible and selling the product at the highest price possible. To lower the cost of the labor, the capitalists do such things as lengthen the work day, lower the wages, require the laborer to work faster and have a higher product output, etc. In essence, get as much out of the laborer while paying him only enough that he may survive. With the introduction of machines, the laborers were able to make double or triple the product as before in the same amount of time, meaning that they did triple the amount of work for the same wage as they did before the machine was invented. This results in capital productive growth and the profit margin becomes larger. When Marx talks about the interests being "one and the same", this is what he's referring to. As the profits grow, the laborers wages increase as well. On the other hand, though the wage increases, the gap between the social classes grows all the wider. This happens because even if the wages increase by a percentage, the increase in profit will be a much greater percentage. Meaning that in comparison to the profit, the laborers actually are receiving a decreased percentage of the capital. Though this is obviously exploitative, both parties profit from this in the sense that the capitalists business becomes larger and his surplus value grows, and the laborers are able to earn more money and more workers are able to be hired. Even if the wage workers are barely payed enough to survive, that's exactly why they need the jobs provided by the capitalists- to live. If the capitalist business fails, then the laborers are out of a job and have no means to live with. And on the contrary, if the capitalist doesn't have laborers that work productively, than his business will fail as well. Both sides need each other, even though they are in a constant struggle with each other- the laborers wanting more, and the capitalists wanting to give less.

3. Marx argues that competition between capitalists and competition between workers drives the system of capitalism. Interpret this part of the reading in your own words-- how are the two related? Think about how Marx uses the concepts of real wages and relative wages-- what is the difference? According to Marx, if real wages for workers increase, does it mean that the working-class has advanced? Why or why not?

Competition between capitalists increases as the market increases. The way to beat the competition is to sell your product at a lesser price than them. The only way to do this is to increase the productive force while not raising production costs. Unfortunately, the competition will eventually start using the same means of production and then the cycle will start all over again. Likewise, the workers have a similar competition between themselves. The wage laborers work for less wages than others as well as working harder to do the work of multiple men. When the machines are introduced, their job becomes much more simple and the skill of that worker is no longer necessary- anyone can push a button or pull a lever. So his job is once again threatened and he works for even less wages and labors even more intensely. This cycle is never ending as well. These two classes relate to one another because the capitalists need the cheaper labor to compete with the other businesses,which the laborer provides for fear of losing his job to a lesser paid worker, and the worker increasing his productivity to keep his job helps the capitalist maintain the lower production cost needed to compete.
The concept of relative and real wages is as follows: as profit increases and capital grows, the wages are often increased as well. Though, for example, if the real wages are increased by 3%, and the profits are actually at a 20% increase, even though the wage increases the gap between the classes grows larger still. The laborer makes more money, but the capitalists makes much more. This means that the real wage increases but the relative wages decreases(meaning that the wages don't increase at the same rate as the profit) In conclusion, this means that the working class has not only NOT advanced, but has fallen even further behind the bourgeoisie.

Here is a link to a live debate related to Baby Marx, a project that debuted at the Walker Art Center last fall, in which Karl Marx and Adam Smith came to life as highly entertaining puppets!

Many of the themes we've covered in the course -- Smith's notion of division of labor and the "invisible hand" of the free market, and Marx's notions of alienation and exploitation-- are lively debated in this video-- featuring U of M professors. The video is lengthy, but check it out if you're interested in exploring the debate in more depth.

"Situated amid the giant set pieces used to film the pilot episode of Pedro Reyes' Baby Marx, University of Minnesota professors Joel Waldfogel, Ben Ansell and Antonio Vazquez-Arroyo engage in a lively Town Hall debate on Communism and Capitalism."

1. Define how wages, labor, commodities, and the cost of production are related in the system of capitalism, as Marx outlines it. What happens to the cost of production as industrial innovations and greater division of labor are introduced, and how does this affect other parts of the system?

2. What does Marx mean when he says that the interests of capitalists and workers are "one in the same?" How are the fates of wage-laborers inextricably tied to those who buy their labor-power (the capitalists)? What are the ultimate implications of this relationship, according to Marx?

3. Marx argues that competition between capitalists and competition between workers drives the system of capitalism. Interpret this part of the reading in your own words-- how are the two related? Think about how Marx uses the concepts of real wages and relative wages-- what is the difference? According to Marx, if real wages for workers increase, does it mean that the working-class has advanced? Why or why not?

What was Durkheim's vision of sociology? Can you discuss it giving examples and comparing it to other disciplines?

Regarding the origin of categories of thought and action, Durkheim suggested that categories are collective representations. Can you explain what he means by that?

Discussion Questions for Emile Durkheim The Rules of Sociological Method

Durkheim was concerned to distinguish social facts, which he sometimes described as "states of the collective mind," from the forms these states manifested through private, individual minds. Can you elaborate on this distinction?

What are the rules Durkheim discusses for the explanation of Social Facts, how do you think they helped to establish sociology as a discipline?

1.- "Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past" (p.111) Can you elaborate on this quote by giving examples from modern social events, e.g. politics of the U.S. etc. and explain what it means for social change and stability.

"Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past" (p.111). This quote from the reading describes how, in society, the state of things in the present day are set up by the structure of society in the past. It is almost impossible to do something without the past having an influence on the decision making process. It is difficult to progress outside of the previous structure because that is all that is known. Even the slightest change could be considered extremely controversial and put down. For example, in modern United States politics, the Vice President does virtually nothing but has still continued being a part of the Executive. The only real purpose of the Vice President is to replace the President if he/she is unable to serve any longer for any reason. There are other ways in which the President could be replaced in times of emergency, but for some reason we still have a Vice President. If someone suggested that we remove the position of Vice President from the government, there would almost certainly be an uproar of dissension. The government of the United States overall has remained relatively unchanged since its establishment even though there are arguably much more efficient ways of governing. This is reflective of the quote from page 111 because even though politicians run government and may slightly alter policies or laws, the government still functions in generally the same way it always has.
One example in the text used a person who is just beginning to learn a new language. The beginner continually has to translate the new language back to the mother tongue in order to understand what is being heard. This is similar to society in that the past structure is always present in the back of the mind of the modern day individual. There is constant comparison to earlier modes of organization which cannot escape the mind. When learning a new language, the only way a person can understand the new language without translating it back to the mother language is when that person forgets the native tongue when using the new. It does not say to discard the mother language altogether, but it does say to forget about the old language when using the new or else the person will not be able to apply the new language most efficiently. The same can be said about society. When implementing new societal structure or when making a drastic change to the format of society, one must forget about the previous societal construction. If this is done, the new design can be successful integrated. If not, the new society will simply be "draped" as the old.
Since the past always has an effect on the present, it makes it very challenging for social change to occur. People get stuck in their ways, and it is difficult to progress up the social ladder. Generally, children end up apart of the same social class as their parents. Most do not stray far up, or down, from where their parents were throughout life. The past structure of society makes it difficult for this change to occur because of multiple influences. Some of these influences being social, cultural, and financial capital. Since there is generally not much leeway for people to move throughout social classes, these classes of people are fairly stable. For example, the upper class is most likely always going to consist of a small minority of the population; if nobody is moving up or down the ladder it is going to remain the same general size. As a result of pre-existing circumstances, societal structure is going to remain fairly stable with little social change; people remain in the same general social class (as their parents) throughout their whole lives. Therefore, the social classes and the structure of society are not going to vary much throughout time.

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels' theory of social change and evolution has a very key focal point. "The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles." (P. 96). Essentially, this means that history has and seemingly forever, will be, focused around conflict. These conflicts are of class, civilization and power. An example of these kinds of conflicts and struggles would be perhaps the journeyman and guild-masters. The journeyman may move on out of town. When this occurrence happens, the class struggle between journeyman and guild-master may shift and all of a sudden merchants may have become the new rival class for the guilds and a new struggle is born. There is a "[struggle] that each time ended, either in a revolutionary re-constitution of society at large, or in the common ruin of the contending class." (P. 97). I believe that this is a primary claim of history and one that Marx and Engels makes evident.
A much more common and classic class struggle would be the antagonism of the Bourgeoisie and the Proletariat. The Proletariat was the working class: the class of wage-earning workers in society. In Marxist theory, the class of industrial workers whose only asset is the labor they sell to an employer. The Bourgeoisie was the middle-class people. They were sought as conventional, conservative, or materialistic. According to Marxist theory, the Bourgeoisie owns the means of producing wealth and exploits the proletariat. "The Bourgeoisie cannot exist without constantly revolutionizing the instruments of production." (P. 98). In context to industrial evolution or just the advancement of production in general, the exploration and discovery of America was fresh soil waiting to be tilled by the up and coming Bourgeoisie. The procurement of Colonialism, increase in trade with the colonies and other industrial factors gave way to the hastened development of production in society. The old ways of feudal times were not sufficient enough anymore for these new evolutions. The industrial production that was monopolized by guilds could not handle the needs of the new market system. Even then, the models of production were ever changing and upgrading constantly. This kind of advancement that could be tribute to the Bourgeoisie is what Marx and Engels are talking about when it comes to evolution. The method that the Bourgeoisie exploited for this type of progress was the exploit of the class considered lower than themselves, the Proletariat.
In history there has been the "haves" and the "have nots", these two classifications are root to the struggle between classes. The Proletariat was always working and providing labor to the Bourgeoisie and eventually the rift between the two classes would widen. It is simple to break the spirit of one man or woman, but when a group amasses with the same interests and wants happen, the "have nots" are going to want the "haves" have. Marx and Engels elaborate greatly on these aspects but I have mentioned what I think are central to the theory of Social change and evolution.

2- What were the three periods Marx identifies in this period and what were the main events that marked out the development of each phase?
Marx asserts that there are three unique revolutions that France went through from February 24th, 1848 to December 1851. He refers the first period as the February period. In this period, it was an introductory revolution to other periods. This period of February, was a temporary which existed until further replaced was found permanently. In other words, in Marx discussion he affirms it as a provisional government. The proletariats which are class of modern wage labors had difficult time dealing with the so called the "bourgeoisie" who are the owners of the means of production. Upon after this period was established or came into existence, the proletariats had considered it to be a social republic. More essentially, the period of February had dropped down the bourgeoisie and the peasants who ones had the power on the political stage. The second period that Marx mentioned is the period of the constitution "the foundation of the bourgeoisie republic". In this period, the Paris proletariats had fought immensely by trying to get a chance to come to an existence again upon holding severe protests. Marx asserts that the demand of the Paris proletariat as a 'utopian nonsense". According to Marx, the Paris proletariats replied with June insurrection but yet the bourgeoisie republic had a significant success. Everything the Paris proletariats did such as the protests still the Paris proletariats couldn't stop the bourgeoisie republic from success. The third period is the constitutional republic or the period of the "legislative National Assembly". According to Marx, this period came into existence from the national elections and represented the whole nation. There weren't any divisions of bourgeoisie or the proletariats but rather this period treated them as a nation.

"The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas, i.e. the class which is the ruling material force of society is at the same time its ruling intellectual force." Foremost, the theory of "historical materialism" pertains to the study of human society. Specifically, how humans use their advantages to acquire their needs of materials. I believe materials/materialism signifies the necessities of production in order to survive. Necessities can relate to a wide range of things. For example, your basic needs of life for survival may include: food/water, shelter, health, and so on. Some people may extend their needs outside of a physiological aspect; such as love/relationships, self-esteem/confidence, personal morality/ethics, and self-actualization. Not everyone's materialism needs are the same. "The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas"-that direct quote itself relates to the historical aspect. Throughout history, especially during the early rise of civilization- it was all about subsistence. The basic means of foundation are all the same whether in what era or time frame. The objection is what you need in order to live. The production of material may not technically be similar in terms of generations, but it is the underlying mean of survival.
To breakdown the second section of the quote, "the class which is the ruling material force of society is at the same time its ruling intellectual force," is somewhat ambiguous. Personally, I believe that it means the class (people in general, not social class) who know what their needs of survival are and know how to obtain them. That gives them the sense of ruling material force of society. They are able to conceptualize the processes they have to endure to reach where they want to be in their lives. Since they are in fact of doing so, simultaneously they are in the forefront; thus means ruling their intellectual force. By definition, intellect means: "the power or faculty of the mind by which one knows or understands, as distinguished from that by which one feels and that by which one wills; the understanding; the faculty of thinking and acquiring knowledge." By putting the two together, ruling of material force and intellectual force, it equivalents to having control. Whoever is able to attain these rulings are in dominance.
There is more to it than just knowing your necessities and how you will grasp it, but you have to know how to maintain it as well. Without being able to maintain it, then there is no control. If there is no control; then there is actually no dominance. The adversity in all of this is being able to manage it all while still being able to develop. Another obstacle may be that your resource for a particular need may not be the right fit for you. Or it may turn out to be not as what you expected, so you may have to go about finding another alternative. It is more than just a physical process, but a mental one as well. Without one or the other, then there is truly no ruling material force and intellectual force.

1. Explain Marx & Engels' theory of "historical materialism," or "the materialist position" by interpreting the following quote from the reading:
"The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas, i.e. the class which is the ruling material force of society is at the same time its ruling intellectual force" (83).

Marx and Engels' theory of "the materialist position" is very much embodied in the quotation from the prompt. The authors explain that the ability to think and reason comes from people being able to create their own possessions through manufacturing and other means. Therefore the means with which you create objects is a source of power, because those with the ability, (the ability being materials), to create have the power to choose what is made with them. If those who are contributing effort to materialism are not using their own materials and are only making products that they are told to make, they have no power. Marx and Engel believe that this means that general laborers have no room to develop intellectually outside of what the ruling class determines for them. This idea makes sense to me because being able to create objects requires reasoning and creative effort and materials required for an object. This would then lead to the tyranny of the individuals who own the means of production, i.e. physical materials, property, machines, money, etc.
During Marx and Engels' time, there were very few opportunities to own material because when there was a tyranny of the wealthier class, the lower class had no means to overrule them. Therefore Marx and Engels' theory held true. Applying this theory to present day, I believe that in our society people have the ability to think, reason, and develop intellectually outside of materialism. For many, a college education is material in itself -- intellectual material. Though there are limits to receiving an education, because of the financial obligation of it. In this scenario the material can be defined as the money required to attend a university, and therefore one who owns the material also own the ability to further himself intellectually. Fortunately for us, many people without the means to attend a university still are able to do so because of government aid.

"Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844":

4. Alienation is a key concept in Marxist logic. What are the implications of alienation for humanity's "species-being?" Describe the process of how the worker becomes alienated from the product of her labor, as laid out in detail in the reading. Reflect on the notion of alienation in our world today-- Can you see alienation at work in your own life, or the lives of people you know?

According to Marx, a worker becomes alienated from the product of his/her labor through mass production and the loss of the idea of trades. Before industries took over, manufacturing had typically been done by one individual who was a master of his trade. Industries replaced trades with mechanisms like assembly lines to increase production and make it more efficient; Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations, describes this as the division of labor. As a result of the division of labor, Marx believed that the worker was extremely depreciated. Workers became easily replaceable and were of very little value. Workers need not know specifics about the entire process, rather, they need only know the bare minimum of information needed to participate in one small part the process. The owners of production discovered that because the general public needs some type of income, they will work for very little if that is all there is offer. The wages of general workers then decreased so that the owners of production could maximize profit. The alienation then comes from the resulting working conditions as they are doing repetitive tasks to receive a paycheck, and in most cases the labor they do does not directly benefit them, other than producing a paycheck, or further them intellectually. A person's "species-being" is what drives them; it makes them have a purpose for what they are creating. Through the separation of labor and the devaluation of workers, they no longer have a connection to the labor they are performing, and it pulls them apart from their "species-being", alienating them.
I see alienation every day. I, personally, work in a position as a student laborer. I am handed a list of items to accomplish and given specific directions as to how those tasks should be accomplished. If I depart from the directions in any way I am reprimanded or possibly fired. This leaves absolutely no room for personal interpretation, and I become a replaceable robot. Thankfully, this is only a part time job that helps pay rent while I am furthering myself intellectually in hopes of one day being in a position of complete intellectual freedom.

1- "Men make their own history, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past" (p.111) Can you elaborate on this quote by giving examples from modern social events, e.g. politics of the U.S. etc. and explain what it means for social change and stability.
2- What were the three periods Marx identifies in this period and what were the main events that marked out the development of each phase?

1- Explain Marx & Engels' theory of social change and evolution by interpreting the following quote from the reading: "The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles." (p. 96)

2- How Marx and Engel's define their goals for society and how industrialization might help to achieve those goals?

Reading Questions for "The German Ideology" and "Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts"

Note: Remember, use these reading questions to guide your exploration of the text and prepare for class. If you choose to use these readings as your post-for-credit, you must respond fully to at least one of these questions in your reflection.

"The German Ideology (1845)":

1. Explain Marx & Engels' theory of "historical materialism," or "the materialist position" by interpreting the following quote from the reading:
"The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas, i.e. the class which is the ruling material force of society is at the same time its ruling intellectual force" (83).

2. How does the materialist position advocated by Marx "turn Hegel on his head?" In other words, explain how Marx transformed earlier theories on the relationship between ideas -and- political, economic, or social transformation. Now think about Kant's statement on humanity's intellectual progress, as realized in the Enlightenment. How would Marx critique Kant's work?

"Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844":

3. "The Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts" provide the basis for a radical critique of political economy. Sketch out this critique, illustrating how Marx built his theory on the following concepts: private property and competition, labor and production of commodities, objectification of the worker, alienation, species-being, and emancipation of the worker. How does Adam Smith's theory of the "invisible hand" of the market contradict the Marxist perspective?

4. Alienation is a key concept in Marxist logic. What are the implications of alienation for humanity's "species-being?" Describe the process of how the worker becomes alienated from the product of her labor, as laid out in detail in the reading. Reflect on the notion of alienation in our world today-- Can you see alienation at work in your own life, or the lives of people you know?

The course blog is the place where we can establish community outside the classroom, talk theory, and post commentary on the readings-- both to fulfill your blogging credit for your class grade, or just because you want to share your brilliant insights on everything sociological.

I've attached a course syllabus here for download-- in case you need an extra copy.

Please remember the general rules for proceeding (These are also outlined in the syllabus):
Purpose of Our Blog:

Social Theory has a course website which we will integrate actively into our study of our key texts. Students are required to post some commentary on the readings before class, but should also make use of the blog to enter into dialogue outside of the classroom with other students, inspire clarifying conversation, or share insights about any of the theories we cover. The instructor and TA will view the blog regularly, respond to questions or comments, as they arise, and sometimes reference the blog directly in class discussions and activities. The blog will also contain important course information, a copy of the syllabus for download, extra supplementary readings, and copies of the powerpoint lectures made available for download after the class in which the material is covered. The website URL and password for the blog will be sent out directly to students via email this week. Starting with Class #3 (Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels I), students are required to post at least five 500-1000 word short reflection essays on the readings, in response to sets of questions on the blog, before the class in which the readings are due. Students are encouraged to make regular use of the course blog as they carefully digest the week's readings. Whether it be reading other students' work, posting your own commentary, or using the reading questions as reference points-- It is our hope that the blog will help you better understand course concepts. Reading questions on the pieces for each class will be posted one week in advance of when the readings are due-- Even if you don't plan to write a reflection essay, you can still use these questions to guide your study!

***Blogging for Credit: Posting a Reflection Essay***

If you are coming to the blog to complete one of your 5 required reflection posts, make sure you read the points in this section carefully. Remember, that you must complete five 500-1000 word "reflection essays" based on the readings for any five class periods you choose. First, find the category for the class period/readings you want to respond to. Take a look at the first post, which will always be a set of questions to guide your journey through the readings. Your reflection essay must respond to at least one of these questions, but you many respond to more than one if you're feeling ambitious. After you've responded to at least one of the focused questions, you can also wax poetic about any of the concepts in the reading-- tell us what you think, but remember to be analytical, critical, and to use your sociological imagination! We recommend that you write your posts in a word document, then copy and paste them into the entry box to avoid losing work. Make sure you publish this post as a NEW ENTRY (not a comment on someone else's entry) and file it under the correct CATEGORY for the readings you're responding to. (You will see a list of categories on the right hand side of the entry box to click). Title your post so we know it is a post for credit-- For example, "Blog Post #2 - Durkheim II." Once you are done, you can "preview" your entry to see what it will look like on the website. Make sure you "Save" at the end to finish publishing your entry. Finally, make sure you've followed the instructions to change your Blog ID to your FULL NAME. It should not say "posted by x500." We need to see your full name under that post to ensure you get credit!

You must post your reflection essay before the class in which the readings are due to get credit for it.

Happy blogging!

Instructions for Using the Blog:

From the "front" of the site you can read the work of your fellow students and leave comments on other people's contributions. You cannot, however, create an independent entry. All of your blog-posts-for-credit have to be independent entries, not comments.

Set up Your Nickname:

If you are already registered for the class, you should be entered on the site as an author. All you need to do is set up a "Nickname" in your user profile, so that the "posted by" line under your blog titles shows a real name instead of an x500 ID. From the main menu page (as soon as you have logged into the blogs), click on your ID button at the top right of the page: It should say, "Hi, (your x500 ID)." Click on that! Once inside, in the "Display Name" box, type in your real first name plus an initial if it is a common name. The blog is protected with a password so that people outside the class with Internet access cannot read what you've written.

Post a Blog Entry:

1. Once you've gone to the blog URL, click on "Student Author Sign In" at the top right-hand side of the page, and enter your x500 ID and password.

2. You'll see a list of blogs you are an author on-- make sure you've clicked on the "Social Theory 2012" blog, and then click on the "Create" pull-down menu, and select "Entry."

3. The Title and Category: Under "Categories" on the right of the entry text box, select the appropriate week's reading topics. Note: If you fail to categorize your entry properly, it won't be read! Then give your entry a title, and paste/type your entry into the "Entry Body" box. Do not use the "Extended Entry" box. If you are making a blog post for credit, make sure you title it "Blog Post #2 - Durkheim II" for example, so we know it's a credit post.

4. Check through your entry, scroll either up to the top or down to the bottom of the page and click "Save." If you want to see what the entry looks like before you publish it, click
on "Preview." Remember that you still have to click "Save this entry" afterwards.